Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts.

The Communist cat is out of the climate change bag

Since the beginning, climate change skeptics have said that the hysteria of the man-made global warming movement, aside from being based on manifestly shoddy and often dishonest science, was in fact a Leftist political gambit. The Communists, having failed to win the world over with a Cold War had regrouped and were seeking to win it over with a warm war. By targeting Western (that is, capitalist) nations as the evildoers in the world’s imminent boiling destruction, and then playing on the fear, guilt and ignorance of those same Western nations, the Communists . . . er, global warming saviors . . . announced a solution: the West should give up its wealth by transferring it en masse to poor nations. The West should also give up its lifestyle, by abandoning electricity, gas and even toilet paper. The West, in other words, should give true meaning to global warming by engaging in self-immolation.

The last month, though, has seen this Communist-inspired house of cards collapse as quickly as the Soviet bloc did back in 1989. First came ClimateGate, which revealed to the whole world the fact that the most ardent climate “scientists” were, in fact, ideologues who cared little about science, and a great deal about achieving a political goal. They lied about their data, destroyed their facts, and systematically set out to muzzle and destroy anyone who disagreed with them.

Second came word from Russia that the same “scientists” (and please understand that these “scientists” are responsible for almost all of the conclusions on which the hysteria was based) cherry-picked climate data from Russia. This is no small thing. Russia covers 12% of the earth, and it’s been the Siberian tree rings that have been at the centerpiece of the warmies’ claims.

And today comes news that definitively rips the mask off of this whole thing. When Hugo Chavez, a man who seeks to turn his beleaguered nation into a Communist worker’s paradise, with himself as leader for life, announces in Copenhagen that capitalism is the real culprit, and is met, not with silence or boos, but with deafening cheers, everything becomes clear:

President Chavez brought the house down.

When he said the process in Copenhagen was “not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn’t that the reality of our world, the world is really and imperial dictatorship…down with imperial dictatorships” he got a rousing round of applause.

But then he wound up to his grand conclusion – 20 minutes after his 5 minute speaking time was supposed to have ended and after quoting everyone from Karl Marx to Jesus Christ – “our revolution seeks to help all people…socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell….let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.” He won a standing ovation.

Let me translate Chavez’s speech: “The capitalist pigs in the United States are the enemies of the people and need to be destroyed.” Chavez’s speech, in other words, is pitch-perfect Communist Cold War rhetoric. During the Cold War, non-Communist bloc nations would have been politely silent, even if they agreed with his sentiments. Thanks to the brainwashing of global warming, however, people no longer feel compelled to hide their hatred for America and their desire for its destruction.

If Barack Obama had anything approaching human decency, he would use this Chavez speech — and, more importantly, the reaction to this Chavez speech — as the justification for refusing to go to Copenhagen. He won’t though. Obama has made it clear, time and time again, that he agrees with the Chavez speech. He too believes that America is the cause of the world’s woes. He too believes that America should be de-energized and debased, both because it would make the world a better place and because America deserves that kind of humiliation. Chavez’s speech, rather than being the straw that should break the Obami back on climate change, is simply the spoken expression of of their innate beliefs.

Incidentally, I realize that I erred somewhat when I compared what’s happening now to 1989. The difference between now and then is the media. Although the media always hewed left, and was steadily dragging Americans into the relativist world of “Communism is just another way of life,” it was still able to recognize the shattering drama of the Solidarity movement and the physical destruction of the Berlin Wall. These were visible symbols of a decades-long conflict, and their occurrence made for good TV.

Things are entirely different here and now. The media, with almost no exceptions, had bought wholesale into the religion of Climate Change. Media members don’t want to see their God fail. Additionally, there’s no good TV here. Instead of hundreds, and then thousands, of Polish dockworkers facing down Soviet guns, or brave people climbing a wall, again to the backdrop of loaded guns, here are have somewhat complex scientific discussions, a few disgraced academics, and Hugo Chavez (a man media people find charismatic). They don’t want the American people to see or know anything about all of this and, because it lacks good visuals, it’s easy to hide. There’s a revolution taking place, and the media is doing its damndest to bury it.

So folks, it’s up to us here, the ones in the blogosphere, to get word of the revolution out. Bloggers need to write, readers need to email blog posts and news articles to their less news obsessive friends. All of us need to put intriguing notes on facebook, linking to articles that will enlighten a population kept in the dark. We need to write letters to our local editors chastising them (politely, of course), for missing out on the biggest story, so far, of the 21st Century — bigger even than the election of a vaguely black, completely red, man into the White House. The one thing I suggest is that you don’t use the “I told you so” approach. People tend not to respond well to that kind of thing. It’s much better, in terms of piquing people’s interest, to strike a tone of incredulous amazement, or excited sense of discovery, or even vague sadness.

There’s a revolution happening here. We have the weapons to destroy the Communist movement’s second attempt to destroy the Western world. Don’t sit on the sidelines. Do something!

Your advice is good, Book, and I intend to act on it — in fact, already have been acting — but we also need a leader.

My I suggest that, in addition to spreading the correct news about climate change, we also strongly support Sarah Palin? In addition to becoming a reallying point for us on the right, she has also become a lightning rod for those on the left. She needs — and deserves — all the support we can give her.

suek

S0…why is Russia throwing a monkey wrench into the climate change works? Doesn’t that seem odd? You’d think that they’d be all in support of a new world communism effort…do you suppose they don’t want to see a return of communism??

Interesting.

Gringo

It is fitting and proper that Chávez lines up with the AGW crowd. Since the Copenhagen conference gave massive applause to Chávez, the people at the conference undoubtedly consider Chávez’s policies as a model for the rest of the world. Undoubtedly those at the Copenhagen conference want the rest of the world to adopt Venezuela’s gasoline pricing: gasoline at twelve cents US per gallon, the cheapest in the world.

suek: one thing the Russians realize is that an AGW dominated world will result in price subsidies for alternatives to petroleum and reduced use of petroleum. The Russkies sell gas and oil, not wind energy turbines.

http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

The “West” meaning all the serfs and slaves of the rich elites, of course.

kali

Gringo, any countyr that tries to honestly live by AGW treaties would wreck their economies–which would benefit Russia and its resurgent imperial ambitions.

Chavez makes his vision, intentions and purpose crystal clear. No surprises, they knew who and what they voted for in Venezuela. The man can smell sulfur from the devil.
To borrow from Book, I’ll translate that Hope & Change message for ya –
“The capitalist pigs in the United States are the enemies of the people and need to be destroyed.”

Excellent post, well said.
As they say, those belonging to the AGW religion are like watermelons. Green on the outside and Marxist red on the inside!http://oldhardhead.wordpress.com/

Danny Lemieux

Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.
I am resigned to the fact that something very dark and terrible is happening in the world that is much bigger than any of us.
Yes, of course we have to resist.

Just as with criminals, they are very dedicated and determined because they have everything to gain, and not much to lose once they make their victims helpless.

BrianE

Owning a dog may be worse for the environment than a SUV.

Good news if you live next to a neighbor with big barking dogs.

In fact the largest sustainable pet may be a hamster.

“SHOULD owning a great dane make you as much of an eco-outcast as an SUV driver? Yes it should, say Robert and Brenda Vale, two architects who specialise in sustainable living at Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand. In their new book, Time to Eat the Dog: The real guide to sustainable living, they compare the ecological footprints of a menagerie of popular pets with those of various other lifestyle choices – and the critters do not fare well.”

I’ve been contemplating replacing the beagle with petri dish. And the cats. And the teenager.
It’s the small sacrifices we make that give us complete moral authority.

http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

It’s their selfishness and eternal greed to exploit others for their own benefit that you see.

BrianE

Carbon tax on everything.

Aunt Sophie won’t actually have to eat her poodle, Fluffy, but she will have to pay an annual carbon tax– say $120 for a medium sized dog like Fluffy.

What’s not to like about this system, it’s a statist dream– the revenues are only limited by the ability to imagine them.

Speaking of fairness, the carbon tax on myself and my wife will need to be offset by all the greenery and oxygen spewing plants we’ve introduced on the old homestead. When we moved here it was sagebrush and desert– now it’s a little bit of Switzerland and we deserve to be rewarded for that.

On the other hand, folks living in Seattle who paved over once vital forests and streams teaming with fish, should pay a never-ending penalty for their urban and CO2 emitting blight.
I would think the absolute best thing would be to see the city razed and the environment renewed to its pristine condition, circa 1800.

I’m a fair kind of guy, so I’ll let them off with an annual penalty for ruining a once idyllic forest, in addition to the carbon tax on their persons.

BrianE

Speaking of the industrialized world subsidizing the third world, it’s time to get real.

The US is doing all the heavy lifting beating back world-wide Muslim jihadiism. We’re more than doing our part.

Maybe its time for the rest of the world to step up and take responsibility for beating back third world poverty. Not that it won’t just be so much money down a rathole.

Mike Devx

Brian E #22 quotes:
> “SHOULD owning a great dane make you as much of an eco-outcast as an SUV driver? Yes it should, say Robert and Brenda Vale, two architects who specialise in sustainable living

What do you think Robert and Brenda Vale would have to say about your second child? Or, may Mother Gaea preserve us, your monstrous third child? Or an unspeakable fourth?

Thank God these two miserable human beings can only pontificate, and have no POWER over our lives. No power, that is, until Obama appoints them as some lifestyle czar couple, or to a medical rights commission.

Zhombre

Screw the Vales. These people are like members of some weird doomsday cult who ache from the realization that they are flesh and blood living in an imperfect world and not angels already. I only wish their green asceticism included vows of silence.

http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

The new jizya, the tax on unbelievers

SADIE

The new jizya, the tax on unbelievers
Worth repeating in ‘bold’.
It can also be used in an interogatory way – Jizya hear Al Franken object to Joe Lieberman asking for another minute to speak?